As many of you know, the charging guidance for early years providers is causing panic and heartache in equal measure. The situation regarding food provision is a worry.

Settings can no longer charge for food – it is a voluntary charge. This means that unless the setting provides food as part of the offer, which is difficult because the funding is tight, then parents can choose not to pay a voluntary contribution for food. There is further anxiety because each local authority is interpreting the guidance differently.

The overall fear is that some children will not automatically get a healthy meal, and parents can decide to provide packed lunches, which will be a logistical nightmare for some settings. This is unfair on many counts, not least because children in schools can access free school meals.

The recent research ‘Nourishing Our Future’ conducted by Anglia Ruskin University, examining healthy food for children in 200 PVI settings in Essex, found that children consume up to 90% of their daily nutrient intake in early years settings. So, the experiences and education provided is critical, especially given the average child obesity rate is over 20%.

I was also interested in the research’s findings about lunchboxes, given they were used by between 40% and 70% of children. What they found was a significant diversity in the nutritional quality of lunchbox food, with a high level of ultra processed packaged foods particularly in lunchboxes of children from the most disadvantaged families.

The settings also said that it was a challenge getting children to extend their food preferences because a lot of children are used to "beige’’ or highly processed food. Plus, there was a whole range of food allergies to consider. The research called for investment in food provision, alongside nutritional support and education for both educators and parents. It recommended clear guidance that reflects the diverse landscape of PVI settings, with targeted support tailored to children's food preferences, allergies and intolerances, including the specific needs of children with SEND. All of this needs to be supported by a government willing to rethink the funding, change the law, and remove the clauses that reference the service as "free" and paying for food is a voluntary contribution.

Research conducted by the London Early Years Foundation (LEYF) led to the launch of the Early Years Chef Academy and a national programme to train nursery and school chefs to be food change catalysts. The chef training has provoked significant improvement in food education, reduced food waste, and increased children's willingness to eat a wide range of seasonal and colourful food.

The food dilemma highlights a fundamental dilemma; the government needs to design a new social contract with the current providers of early years education and care within the market model. What was a business-to-parent contract is now becoming a taxpayer-to-business contract. Until this is resolved, nothing will change and children from underserved communities will be the losers.